As I unsubtly implied I'd do in my last article, here's my ranking of the "Harry Potter" movies, from worst to best. Just like with the novels, this list was difficult to do, as there are very good entries in the movie series and these are movies that I grew up watching. I know every single word to "Philosopher's Stone," and cried tears of sadness when I watched the second part of "Deathly Hallows," as I realized that a very important part of my childhood was over.

Personally, I always felt that the movies lost a lot of steam with the arrival of David Yates in 2007, back when I was a kid and later when I became significantly more knowledgeable of the craft of cinema. Nevertheless, Harry Potter won most of its fandom through the movies, so there has to be something good in them, doesn't it?

So, without further ado, here's my ranking of the films. Spoiler alert.

8. "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"

Just like I said and will repeatedly say until I die, David Yates ruined this movie series. Not only do I feel a personal dislike for this film, but do I also recognize that it has almost nothing going for it. The adaptation of my second favorite novel in the series is absolutely the most forgettable of all films, which is just sad.

Not only as an adaptation of the novel but as part of the Harry Potter canon, the sixth film in the series is far inferior in almost every aspect of filmmaking, except for the Oscar-nominated cinematography, which I have to admit is pretty exceptional.

The film skips the most interesting parts of the novel, showing only two – TWO! – travels into the pensieve to study Voldemort's origins, when in the book there are five. It skips almost everything to do with Quidditch, and it modifies Dumbledore's death scene in a way that doesn't make sense in a logical world, without taking the book into account.

Instead, like I mentioned in my previous article, the movie introduces a huge sequence that wasn't in the book and makes the events of the next film seem illogical and unwise.

In the film, Bellatrix and other Death Eaters attack the Weasley Burrow, burning it to the ground and being close to fighting Harry and part of the Order.

How exactly did they find the Burrow? And why didn't they just kill them? How come Voldemort didn't go there himself to capture Harry? Why did Bill's wedding still occur at the Burrow the next year if the Death Eaters can infiltrate and even destroy the house? Makes no sense. They actually chose this nonsensical sequence instead of a travel in the pensieve. Thanks, Yates.

The same happens with the death of Dumbledore. In the movie, Bellatrix and other Death Eaters infiltrate Hogwarts to watch Malfoy kill Dumbledore... And then leave. What?! Why would they just leave? In the book, it'snotBellatrix, since there are other Death Eaters besides her, and they infiltrate Hogwarts, cast the Dark Mark, and fight members of the order. It's only after they defeat them that they go watch Malfoy.

It doesn't make sense for Bellatrix-f*cking-Lestrange to simply leave Hogwarts without killing anybody else, when there wasn't even any resistance. What I could do in a director's chair... #FireDavidYates #RemakeHalfBloodPrince

7. "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix"

Here it is; the movie where we got introduced to Yates' fetish for blueish grey filters in his movies, which I thoroughly dislike. Ever since I watched this movie in the theater back in 2007, I felt something was different. It didn't feel magic anymore – and I'm not talking about the "magic of the movies," but actual magic.

It felt like a movie about teenagers fighting against an evil new teacher who eventually becomes principal. But you know what the worst part is? It doesn't deviate too much from the book, but it's still boring.

I was reluctant to read this book at first because of how disappointing the movie was, but when I read it I actually felt relief, knowing that Rowling wasn't an inconsistent writer but that Warner Bros just had sh*tty taste in directors.

The action in this movie is so, so underwhelming, it feels like people playing with sticks instead of magic; it's amazing how the book manages to make the sequence at the Ministry of Magic far more entertaining, exciting and suspenseful using only written text. None of the members of the Order are properly introduced, making their actions and deaths in subsequent films have absolutely no weight to them.

If there is one thing this movie got right was Dolores Umbridge. Imelda Staunton, the actress who plays Umbridge, did an excellent job in capturing the mannerisms and voice the woman channels through the words in the book. Nevertheless, Umbridge's role is not fully fleshed out in the movie, which makes her a disappointment for being so underused.

Yates turned the special effects department towards CGI instead of the great practical from the previous movies, which made this one look worse than previous entries. All of this, combined with the movie being the shortest of the bunch while being based on the longest novel, make this entry not much better than the its sequel #RemakeOrderofthePhoenix

6. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1"

I think this movie gets a lot more hate than it deserves. Yes, it's inferiorly directed by David Yates, like its predecessors. Yes, it has the least interesting parts of the best novel in the series. And yes, nothing of weight seems to happen in this first half of the final chapter. But I still think it's very worthwhile and that people should look at the bigger picture, instead of just hating on it because there's almost no action.

Sadly, the movie does spend a lot of time with our main characters in the woods, cluelessly looking for Voldemort's horcruxes. But, contrary to what I've heard from lots and lots of people, it's not just mindless walking, stopping and arguing; these scenes in the woods feature some of the deepest character development the series has ever given to the trio. It'd be a lot better in the hands of another director, of course, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have at least something going for it.

Where this movie ultimately fails is with connecting with the rest of the canon, of both books and films. There's no logical explanation for how Harry got one side of the two-way mirror, or how Aberforth got the other piece. There's also no connection to the attack at the Burrow from the last film, which was itself atrocious and nonsensical. So, once again, Yates achieved to dishonor an adaptation of Rowling's incredible series of books, although not as bad as his previous attempts #RemakeDeathlyHallows #StopGivingYatesWork

5. "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone"

Finally, we get to the "good side" of the series. The first chapter in Harry's story is full of great special effects, excellent acting from the children, and a very intriguing story, while also improving on every aspect possible from the novel. The producers already knew that Rowling's story was more mature than what her book implied, so the first film in the series introduces magic and its world in a more grounded and "realistic" way, making this film hold up for adults a lot better than the novel.

But, just like the novel, the film features some pacing issues. Yes, it's great that they took their time to introduce us to the world and the dozens of new concepts to be explored in the series, but this makes the movie feel slightly inconsistent. Some things are left choppily explained, and sometimes it feels there is no real conflict in the story but only the troubles of being a new student at Hogwarts. Nevertheless, the film is still wonderful and made me fall in love with this franchise from the very beginning.

4. "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

This film is the prime example of filmmakers learning from their mistakes, and improving on the good things they had going. The second entry in the film series keeps the special effects and great cast of its predecessor, while also improving upon its novel by skipping some irrelevant subplots.

Everything from this movie matches the book perfectly: Aragog, Lockhart, the mystery with the Heir of Slytherin, everything is as greatly adapted as possible. The whole mystery surrounding the Chamber of Secrets has always been fascinating to me, and I think it's what elevates this movie over its predecessor and many other entries in the series.

I've never quite understood the hate that this movie gets. Sure, the polyjuice potion not giving them the person's voice for no apparent reason is dumb and makes no sense in latter installments, but I've always found the rest of the movie to be thoroughly entertaining and engaging, even at its very long runtime.

This movie gives the world a bigger scope and introduces some interesting magic that extends the perception of what wizards and witches are capable of doing. Kenneth Branagh is absolutely perfect as Lockhart, and the resolution inside the Chamber is far better portrayed than in the novel.

3. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2"

It is actually possible to make a decent film that's both faithful to its source material and perfectly good on its own. Who would've thought?

Certainly, the epic scale of the final chapters of the last book are very well portrayed here. With a relentless pacing and entertaining sequences, the second part of the conclusion to the series helps to elevate its inferior predecessor, making for a satisfying conclusion to this beloved franchise. For the first time in his life, David Yates improves upon the source material, making the Battle of Hogwarts more epic in scale and stakes, presenting other characters fighting for the castle and doing spells we had never seen before, neither in the films or in the novels.

Nevertheless, I'm always reluctant when talking about this movie, because I think it gave the wrong idea to the studio about what David Yates is capable of doing. This movie did a billion dollars, and the credit seems to go mostly to Yates as a director, but I thoroughly disagree; for him to have such a short vision for the future of the franchise by not explaining the origin of the mirror or introducing the members of the Order is unforgivable, because it makes the cool-looking battle all the less impactful.

He also skips Fred's death scene, which also makes it kind of rushed and out of place when we find out he died. This movie did a billion dollars thanks to the groundwork laid out by Rowling's books and the previous films, not Yates' direction.

Still, this movie is quite entertaining. The final fight between Voldemort and Harry is a lot better than in the book, with a better sense of space and without the characters explaining the plot while surrounded by students. Though this isn't as good as it could've been, the source material is epic enough for it to be adapted into a more-than-decent film, that of course made everybody cried with its epilogue.

2. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban"

I can already feel your hate coming through me.

The most beloved film of the series, "Prisoner of Azkaban" definitely raises the bar in the filmmaking aspect. Being directed by one of my personal inspirations, Alfonso Cuarón, the movie differentiates itself from the previous two by including more mature themes and darker tones – both aesthetic and thematic – in various scenes.

Featuring Cuarón's signature long takes and deliciously crafted cinematography, this movie, I'd say, is the one that exceeds the most as a good film rather than a good entry into the Harry Potter canon.

Although it does skip some subplots and characters, the film is still very faithful to the book, including excellent portrayals of Lupin and Sirius, the Boggart, Buckbeak, the Shrieking Shack, Hogsmeade, and Divination. Sure, most of the subplot regarding the friendship between the Marauders' is cut short, but that was one of the most awkward parts of the book anyway. Instead of spending twenty minutes with the characters sitting at the Shack and explaining everything, we instead get straight into the action and are shown only what's absolutely important for the overall plot.

One of my favorite things in the movie are the Dementors, as their design and presence looks damn well, especially compared to the redesign present in Yates' movies.

This movie is universally considered to be the best of all, and I wouldn't disagree with anybody whose opinion is that. Nevertheless, I never liked the fact that there was no clear antagonist in the film – even though, in the novel, it's Sirius; I think it could be a lot better if they had kept that aspect intact.

Seriously, though, Yates' Dementors look f*cking awful.

1. "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire"

How I wish to be able to erase my memory and go back to watch this film. Nothing compares to the first time you presence the twist at the end with the portkey, or Voldemort's rebirth, or Barty Crouch Jr.'s reveal.

This film adapts from the source material so perfectly, I was actually impressed when I read the book to find that the most interesting and important parts were kept almost intact. This movie has excellent action, great special effects, a riveting story, the most incredible twists, and the best opening sequence of the series.

Although a lot of the subplots were cut, I think it was for the best. Barty Crouch Jr.'s story, for example, was very awkwardly explained in the novel, and it was very long and complicated to include into the movie without completely ruining the pacing. The subplots regarding the House Elves and the politicians would've probably felt overlong, and the addition of characters like Winky would have stuffed the movie into an awkward package.

If I got the opportunity to change something from the movie, it'd be cutting the dragon chase and giving that time to the challenge inside the maze. First of all, the chase through the castle with the Hungarian Horntail never happens in the novel, and it doesn't make sense inside the movie; the dragon could have easily killed dozens of non-participating students and teachers. And I feel the challenge in the maze was too short and slightly confusing; it'd been better to show the terrors inside of it, or how Krum got cursed, for example.

Nevertheless, this movie carries all the excellence of its source material, and improves upon some aspects of its storytelling. Although Cuarón is the best director from the series, Goblet of Fire is, without a doubt, the best adapted and most engaging movie of all.

But what do you think? Do you think Azkaban deserves the top spot? What's your least favorite of all the Yates movies?

Also, I've taken several House quizzes over the years, and most of them have determined that I'm a Ravenclaw, if anyone cares. Do what that information whatever you want, if anything.

Peace out.

#SaveFantasticBeasts